Consumer Alert: AdviceBox.com Isn't Anonymous Email

EFF is warning the public about a so-called anonymous email service located at Advicebox.com. Advicebox.com's tagline is "Anonymous email made easy" but this service does not provide real anonymity -- it's a trap for the unwary and should not be used by battered spouses, whistleblowers and others who need real protection.

We were alerted to AdviceBox.com trap when we were approached by an anonymous critic who believed the tagline, paid the fee and used the service to send an "anonymous" extremely critical email about a former employer. The employer ran to court, and AdviceBox.com handed the critic's name over to the former employer giving our critic less than a three days notice -- not nearly enough time to find an attorney and make a motion to protect his identity. He has lost his current job as a result.

So has AdviceBox.com violated its promise? Certainly if you look at the way this service is marketed. The Website is filled with stuff like this:

"Send your anonymous email here!"

and this

"What is anonymous email? The ability to send email without revealing
your identity to the recipient."

But as Tom Waits once noted, what the large print giveth, the small print taketh away. AdviceBox.com doesn't really provide anonymous email -- email where the recipient cannot find out your identity.

6. Member Conduct
. . . You acknowledge and agree that Advicebox may preserve Content and may also disclose Content if required to do so by law or in the good faith belief that such preservation or disclosure is reasonably necessary to:

(a) comply with legal process; (b) enforce the TOS; (c) respond to claims that any Content violates the rights of third-parties; or (d) protect the rights, property, or personal safety of Advicebox, its users and the public.

So AdviceBox.com won't protect you if anyone "claims that any content violates the rights of third parties." And what critical speech isn't vulnerable to claims that it violates the rights of people being criticized? Advicebox.com will respond to "legal process" like subpoenas, but we've long seen that legal process is used to silence criticism. It's difficult to see how Advicebox.com's service is any more protective of your identity than simply choosing the name smoochy@myisp.com. Most ISPs don't go around handing out their customer's identies either.

People who need real anonymity would be much better off setting up a free webmail account without giving identifying information and using Tor to hide their IP address. This will not only give them better protection, it will save them the $4.95 per month that AdviceBox charges.

BTW, we tried to contact AdviceBox's counsel about this before the Doe's name
was turned over. They didn't return our call.

[UPDATE: Counsel for Doe, the amazing Charles Mudd , informs us that despite AdviceBox's failure to give sufficient notice, he was able to get an emergency motion on file. AdviceBox then handed the information over to the ex-employer immediately upon receiving notice that the emergency motion was denied, despite knowing that Doe wanted to appeal. So much for caring about anonymous speech]

Related Updates

The U.S. Senate is about to vote on a bill that would be disastrous for online speech and communities. The Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA, H.R. 1865) might sound appealing, but it would do nothing to fight sex traffickers. What it would do...

People in marginalized communities who are targets of persecution and violence—from the Rohingya in Burma to Native Americans in North Dakota—are using social media to tell their stories, but finding that their voices are being silenced online. This is the tragic and unjust consequence of content moderation policies...

It’s no secret: Social media has changed the way that we access news. According to the Pew Research Center, two-thirds of Americans report getting at least some of their news on social media. Another study suggests that globally, for those under 45, online news is now as important...

In a victory for journalism and fair use, Playboy Entertainment has given up on its lawsuit against Happy Mutants, LLC, the company behind Boing Boing. Earlier this month, a federal court dismissed Playboy’s claims but gave Playboy permission to try again with a new complaint, if it...

More than 15 state legislatures are considering the “Human Trafficking Prevention Act” (HTPA). But don’t let the name fool you: this bill would do nothing to address human trafficking. Instead, it would only threaten your free speech and privacy in a misguided attempt to block and tax online pornography...

Frankenstein Bill Combines the Worst of SESTA and FOSTA. Tell Your Representative to Reject New Version of H.R. 1865. The House of Representatives is about to vote on a bill that would force online platforms to censor their users. The Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act...

In a win for free expression, a court has dismissed a copyright lawsuit against Happy Mutants, LLC, the company behind acclaimed website Boing Boing. The court ruled [PDF] that Playboy’s complaint—which accused Boing Boing of copyright infringement for linking to a collection of centerfolds—had not sufficiently established...

In a country where press freedom is already under grave threat, the revocation of an independent publication’s license to operate and a proposed amendment to the Bill of Rights are pushing journalists further into the margins. While the Constitution of the Philippines guarantees press freedom and the country’s media landscape...

A huge range of expressive works—including books, documentaries, televisions shows, and songs—depict real people. Should celebrities have a veto right over speech that happens to be about them? A case currently before the California Court of Appeal raises this question. In this case, actor Olivia de Havilland has sued...